Blackman v. City of Hot Springs

Citations

• 14 S.D. 497
• 85 N.W. 996
• 1901 S.D. LEXIS 38

Syllabus

<p>1. Where an appeal is from the judgment alone, and not from the order subsequently made denying a new trial, no question of the sufficiency of the evidence to justify the findings can be reviewed.</p> <p>2. Where, in an action against the city on its warrants, there was no claim that the transfer of the warrants to plaintiff was without notice, or before maturity, the admission of evidence that the agent of t'he plaintiff at the time of the purchase of the warrants had never heard of any defense to them, though erroneous, was not prejudicial to defendant.</p> <p>3. Where, in an action on city warrants, plaintiff based his right to recover on the fact that defendant had failed to levy taxes to pay the general fund warrants issued by the city, and had used money belonging to that fund in paying other warrants, instead of applying it to the proper payment of warrants in the order of their presentation, plaintiff could show on cross-examination of defendant’s witnesses that moneys had been so appropriated by the city to the current fund, instead of being applied to warrants as presented.</p> <p>4. Where the evidence cannot be reviewed, it will be presumed that the findings of the court were based on sufficient evidence.</p>